Toronto Queen's Park North Revitalization

[UtakataNoAnnex]

^....that's almost as juicy if local jurisdictions forced Mar-a-Lago to become a nature reserve.

Er, right...back on topic! Sorry about Mr. 42! >.<

 

[torontologist]

No one is going to use that treewalk.

Ugh this is the last remaining spot downtown with a sufficient amount of grass so that it doesn't feel weird having a picnic. There's enough space to allow for buffers between groups for some sort of "privacy", and the park is just big enough to provide relief and tranquility from the concrete and noise (rather than a little parkette which does not give the same psychological relief). And yet they are reducing the grass area.

If anything, they should be adding a ring of understory/gardens around the running track to hide car traffic from view within the park.

 

[JacksonYodels]

I don’t usually post, but this park renovation seemed almost too bizarre not to.

I live close by, and the criteria they’re using to design the park seem completely arbitrary. I understand climate change and indigenous reconciliation as important, but I fail to see the relevance in this space specifically. Is Margaret Atwood going to waddle down from the Annex and use an indigenous ceremonial fire?

If you want reconciliation- it’s more than cheap symbolism in a park devoid of any real indigenous community. It’s actually ensuring equity - access to clean water, housing, and fair governance in indigenous communities.

It also feels like the local community was not consulted at all. Basic things like a playground for kids are not included, but a tree walk is? It talks about sustainability while at the same time ripping up large parts of work that were installed just a few years back.

Perhaps worst of all is just the lack of ambition and creativity. This is great time to reimagine the park - why not suggest some reconfiguration of the local road network so it’s less of an island? There is probably not enough money to bury queens park crescent - but you could likely get rid of Wellesley and connect the north and south parks. Even some fun pedestrian bridges could get built at the busier pedestrian intersections - more practical than a structure to… look at trees?

It also feels like they want to turn this place into some sort of urban forest instead of using it as a park that people actually use to picnic in. As if they had never used it in their life.

The whole thing rubs me the wrong way, like the Weston’s are out there wanting to take charge of a well used public space with little regard for how it’s used and for who. The park sits between UofT, the museum’s, Yorkville, the village, hospital row, and the centre of democracy in the province - some of that should influence the park. The Gardiner museum could provide some large ceramics, the ROM could provide some history. It could be a really exciting project, but what we’re getting is a park that seems designed for the wealthiest family in Canada with some cheap symbolism to distract from that fact.

Just disappointing.


(I will now go back to my long time lurking)

 

[picard102]

The only positive is that there is no playground.

 

[Northern Light]

I don’t usually post, but this park renovation seemed almost too bizarre not to.

It is.

If you want reconciliation- it’s more than cheap symbolism in a park devoid of any real indigenous community. It’s actually ensuring equity - access to clean water, housing, and fair governance in indigenous communities.

I agree, of course, the City will tell you that most substantive things, particularly on-reserve investments are outside their jurisdiction.....

It also feels like the local community was not consulted at all. Basic things like a playground for kids are not included, but a tree walk is? It talks about sustainability while at the same time ripping up large parts of work that were installed just a few years back.

I agree with the above except in respect of a playground. If you don't want to remove a large number of trees, there really isn't much space to put one that's any good, particularly with so many busy pathways. Families with playground-aged children aren't as rare as they used to be near the park, but aren't the typical park user either, there is a new, if under-sized playground at Lillian McGregor Park near by, and there are other potential sites that I think would work better.

Perhaps worst of all is just the lack of ambition and creativity. This is great time to reimagine the park - why not suggest some reconfiguration of the local road network so it’s less of an island? There is probably not enough money to bury queens park crescent - but you could likely get rid of Wellesley and connect the north and south parks. Even some fun pedestrian bridges could get built at the busier pedestrian intersections - more practical than a structure to… look at trees?

I'm afraid you can't get rid of Wellesley:

That's how the Wellesley bus gets from Hoskn back on to Wellesley in the EB direction, you can't go south on Queen's Park Crescent East.

Its also the access point to the legislature parking lot and to the University of Toronto from the east, including its new underground parking garage under front campus (which I opposed, but I digress, its done)

Reducing the number of lanes on, or removing Queen's Park West entirely has been considered, but doing so involves many complex and expensive trade-offs. I won't list them all here, I will simply say, that idea is not yet funded or deliverable with the 50M budget.

I do think removing one lane SB from Hoskin is feasible now, but doing so would soak up over 1/2 the budget, and there were other complications.

It also feels like they want to turn this place into some sort of urban forest instead of using it as a park that people actually use to picnic in. As if they had never used it in their life.

Many of the people involved in this design have not ever used Queen's Park. Some have.

They are aiming for about 50% forest. I don't mind the idea of some naturalization, but I agree, the proposal is over-reach.

I think they failed to assess how existing park users make use of the space, and want to make use of the space, and have not accounted for that when considering how to balance competing ideas.

Parks has a perpetual problem of trying to over-program as well. Doing too many things in too little space to the point of ticking off just about everyone.

The whole thing rubs me the wrong way, like the Weston’s are out there wanting to take charge of a well used public space with little regard for how it’s used and for who.

Hillary (Weston) now deceased, expressed her wish to leave as a legacy a beautified and well maintained Queens Park, it was a space she saw regularly when she served at Lieutenant Governor of Ontario.

I didn't discuss any vision w/her before she passed, by I don't believe it would have resembled what is now contemplated. I think the City has just made a mess of this process.

The park sits between UofT, the museum’s, Yorkville, the village, hospital row, and the centre of democracy in the province - some of that should influence the park. The Gardiner museum could provide some large ceramics, the ROM could provide some history. It could be a really exciting project, but what we’re getting is a park that seems designed for the wealthiest family in Canada with some cheap symbolism to distract from that fact.

The ROM, the Gardiner, The U of T and the Conservatory have all been consulted along with neighbourhood associations and First Nations.

Each group has had some thoughtful contributions to make and some that have not or should not have seen the light of day.

The problem is not so much who is being left out, that's almost nobody...... its that there isn't clear, coherent leadership or vision, that there are too many competing ideas and that they are all trying to be humoured in some way when there isn't space for that.

Just disappointing.

Yes.

(I will now go back to my long time lurking)

Not yet you don't. Go fill out the damned survey and share you opinion! Email the planner in charge or Paul Farish who is the Director of Parks Planning & Strategic Initiatives for the City of Toronto's Parks branch.

Don't just complain from the sidelines, let the people in charge know that they are off track and that you expect better.

 

[JacksonYodels]

Don’t worry, I did fill out the survey.

And thanks for the reply! I think there’s probably a bit of back and forth in all of this.

Especially Wellesley - you can actually loop around queens park at the south end, so it’s not as necessary as it seems for the bus. Maybe add a minute or two on to do the loop.

I think my larger point is that the possibilities and real problems for the park both have not been properly considered. Whike so much of what’s considered here is just rehashing the design that was just done.

To me this whole redesign could focus just on the connection between the south and north park. Is all of the parking necessary for Queen’s Park? Could the formal garden not go into the South Park which is traditionally more formal?

It feels like the whole area needs a master plan. For the two parks together, for pedestrian connections, for traffic. Heck, the South Park doesn’t even have proper sidewalks next to Queens Park Crescent- yet they’re talking about moving statues around in the north park that were just redone. I’d like the whole site to work cohesively before all these extras.

 

[Northern Light]

Don’t worry, I did fill out the survey.

Glad to hear it.

And thanks for the reply!

You're welcome.

I think there’s probably a bit of back and forth in all of this.

That's likely.

Especially Wellesley - you can actually loop around queens park at the south end, so it’s not as necessary as it seems for the bus. Maybe add a minute or two on to do the loop.

Ah, but the entrance to the parking garage, and the legislature parking.............and about that bus..........were we not just discussing removing Queen's Park Crescent West, which is how the bus would reach that loop?

I think my larger point is that the possibilities and real problems for the park both have not been properly considered. Whike so much of what’s considered here is just rehashing the design that was just done.

Yes.

To me this whole redesign could focus just on the connection between the south and north park.

Hornet's nest. The City neither owns/nor controls the park south of Wellesley, that's managed by the legislature.

Is all of the parking necessary for Queen’s Park?

From my perspective? No. The government owns/controls a large underground parking garage just to the east, some sort of pick-up/drop-off at the surface may be needed or very limited short-term parking, but certainly must less than is there now. But again, the City has no control over that, south of Wellesley is not under their purview, the the province. The land to the west belonging to U of T.

Could the formal garden not go into the South Park which is traditionally more formal?

Again, not the City's land, that requires the province to sign off. That aside, I'm not sure there is much more room with the grounds configured as they are, we are at risk of memorial clutter.

Now, there are ways to address this, there's parking on that side of the legislature too, and Queen's Park Crescent West and there's room to reconsider things, but we're spending a lot more than 50M now.

It feels like the whole area needs a master plan. For the two parks together, for pedestrian connections, for traffic. Heck, the South Park doesn’t even have proper sidewalks next to Queens Park Crescent- yet they’re talking about moving statues around in the north park that were just redone. I’d like the whole site to work cohesively before all these extras.

Again, two different property owners/managers, and when considering the other adjacent lands, three, with the University of Toronto, herding cats is less challenging.

Coordinating everyone would be essential if any version of University Park were to go ahead.

There are different ways to pursue that; but as it stands, no one is willing to write that cheque. Looking strictly at the portion of that idea north of College street, to the north end of Queen's Park North, I'd ballpark about 200M.

But it really depends on which solutions you advance. I'm not opposed to that discussion, but the City hasn't really shown any interest in driving things forward with its own money. Its unclear how much more the Westons' might chip in; though there is more than 50M there potentially for the right idea; U of T is willing to fork over some substantial dollars, but nothing I've heard suggests that its at the level that would make 'University Park' possible.

There's more to it than all that. Which isn't to let anyone off the hook.

That said, I think something wonderful can be done in the northern Park that will improve it, while we see if we can't get lift off for a bigger plan. The measures that could be delivered need not be inconsistent with or wasted by University Park, 10 years later. Its just that that is not the current idea set.

 

[GameOnBrad]

I do remember a proposal to renovate part of Queen's Park to include a Parking Garage. Did they actually complete that?

That parking lot on the north east side is where all the MPPs park (used to park?). I haven't been at that specific intersection in awhile but I used to see MPPs entering and leaving that parking lot all the time on my walks when I lived over in that area.

 

[Northern Light]

I do remember a proposal to renovate part of Queen's Park to include a Parking Garage. Did they actually complete that?

No. Its under consideration, last I heard, as part of the 1B (and climbing) plan to comprehensively restore the legislature building. But nothing much about that has been made public or confirmed since 2024.

Last I heard, they were hoping to get underway in 2027. But whether the parking makes it into that project.....dunno.